That's pretty close to a response I gave someone offlist. I basically
agreed that we should do it, but said that committing a bunch of formatting
changes tends to add a lot of noise in the history logs, so doing a release,
and realizing there is are a few small changes that might have been a
mistake makes looking at history (across the format commit) almost
impossible. The "well, let's see what it _used_ to do" becomes an exercise
in insanity.
All in all, it needs to be done. When? That's not my decision.
I'll let you take it from here.
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance
EdgeTech, Inc.
http://www.edgetechservices.net/
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Skype: jmitchtx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: Thoughts on Checkstyle stuff
Sorry James, I missed this email as apparently Thunderbird thought it was
junk :) I'm willing to take the time to apply this patch if you have no
objection. While I'd like to think 1.3.0 is days away, past experience
has shown "don't hold your breath". My first concern looking at the patch
was converting from unix to dos style endlines, however, if some are one
style and others another, it would at least be valuable to be consistent.
The other concern is these changes might screw up existing patches that
need to be applied, so perhaps we should save this patch until the last
major bugs have been fixed. What do you think?
Don
James Mitchell wrote:
I saw the tread, but I haven't followed that discussion. I would rather
wait till after 1.3.0 is out there. If you can wait till things settle
down, I'd be happy to apply your fixes then. After all, the activity
may make your patches out of date and we would need to do it ourselves
or ask for help again.
Ping me again after 1.3.0 is out and remind me to get on this. Thanks
man.
--
James Mitchell
Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist
Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance
EdgeTech, Inc.
http://www.edgetechservices.net/
678.910.8017
AIM: jmitchtx
Yahoo: jmitchtx
MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Skype: jmitchtx
On Aug 24, 2005, at 12:43 AM, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Anyone have a chance to look or think about this? I'd like to continue
the work but I'd also like to know if folks are receptive to it or not.
Maybe you were all just busier today than I was... I Unfortunately
have a car that's getting ready to die any day now, so most of my time
was spent leisurely comparing and running numbers all day :)
Frank
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Hi all,
I'm just trying to guage what the consensus is with regard to applying
Checkstyle fixes (yes, it's a bit of a strange itch perhaps, but it's
*my* itch! :) )...
I just submitted a batch (ticket #36306), and would like to resolve as
many more as possible, but I'd like to know what everyones' thinking
is with regard to when they will/should be applied... would I be
putting in a little too much effort if I'm trying to get them into the
first 1.3 release? What I mean is, if everyone thinks they should be
put off for a later release then there's no need for me to bust my
butt as much, I can work a bit more leisurely on things :)
If however, folks think it would be better to get them applied sooner
than later, which is my belief frankly, any committer willing to do
that in the short term?
Just as a quick summary... I counted 4,760 Checkstyle complaints on
the current TRUNK, and the batch I just submitted resolves 1,462.
Virtually none of it alters actual code, in fact only 178 do and that
was just to break up lines longer than 80 characters, so I'd say these
are relatively benign fixes (and I'll state what should be assumed:
everything compiled fine for me and all unit tests passed). There's
still probably 2,000 more or so that would fall into that same
relatively "safe" category (lots of javadocs fixes for example) before
I even think about those that might require some actual
thought/discussion :)
Thanks all!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
